DREAM THEATER ANNOUNCE THE RETURN OF DRUMMER MIKE PORTNOY

[gzarruk]

Here is more detail regarding that exchange. I am going to paraphrase from memory so please forgive me if I don't get the wording 100%.

As Scotty mentioned, JP said MP gets bored and can play any DT song straight from memory. But for JP, he said that he has to learn a ton of parts so for example relearning Octavarium (I think he used Octavarium specifically as an example) is a ton of work for him. He said that he has really enjoyed NOT doing different setlists the last couple years because it allows him to focus on the production of the shows. He basically said that some degree of changes each night were very likely to happen, though he did not say to what extent. He didn't say 100% but my read of the response was that the days of the same exact setlist each and every night are over.

None of the other 'public' questions are worth discussing.

What's interesting to me is that none of MP's post-DT projects (or any of his side projects during his first tenure with DT) ever did the rotating setlists thing. I can totally see him as the guy who gets bored playing the same static set over and over again, but that's basically what he has been doing for the past 13 years. Sure, he did have a lot of variation switching between various bands each year, but every specific tour he did for each band had for the most part a rock steady setlist throughout each show.

[cramx3]

Here is more detail regarding that exchange. I am going to paraphrase from memory so please forgive me if I don't get the wording 100%.

As Scotty mentioned, JP said MP gets bored and can play any DT song straight from memory. But for JP, he said that he has to learn a ton of parts so for example relearning Octavarium (I think he used Octavarium specifically as an example) is a ton of work for him. He said that he has really enjoyed NOT doing different setlists the last couple years because it allows him to focus on the production of the shows. He basically said that some degree of changes each night were very likely to happen, though he did not say to what extent. He didn't say 100% but my read of the response was that the days of the same exact setlist each and every night are over.

None of the other 'public' questions are worth discussing.

What's interesting to me is that none of MP's post-DT projects (or any of his side projects during his first tenure with DT) ever did the rotating setlists thing. I can totally see him as the guy who gets bored playing the same static set over and over again, but that's basically what he has been doing for the past 13 years. Sure, he did have a lot of variation switching between various bands each year, but every specific tour he did for each band had for the most part a rock steady setlist throughout each show.

I guess MP also might not have had the pull to do the rotating setlists he wants in the other bands.  In DT he certainly used to have that power, and it seems he'll be getting at least some of that control back if JP already acknowledges rotating setlists are coming back.

[Stadler]

Here is more detail regarding that exchange. I am going to paraphrase from memory so please forgive me if I don't get the wording 100%.

As Scotty mentioned, JP said MP gets bored and can play any DT song straight from memory. But for JP, he said that he has to learn a ton of parts so for example relearning Octavarium (I think he used Octavarium specifically as an example) is a ton of work for him. He said that he has really enjoyed NOT doing different setlists the last couple years because it allows him to focus on the production of the shows. He basically said that some degree of changes each night were very likely to happen, though he did not say to what extent. He didn't say 100% but my read of the response was that the days of the same exact setlist each and every night are over.

None of the other 'public' questions are worth discussing.

What's interesting to me is that none of MP's post-DT projects (or any of his side projects during his first tenure with DT) ever did the rotating setlists thing. I can totally see him as the guy who gets bored playing the same static set over and over again, but that's basically what he has been doing for the past 13 years. Sure, he did have a lot of variation switching between various bands each year, but every specific tour he did for each band had for the most part a rock steady setlist throughout each show.

Apples and Cadillacs.   The last Transatlantic tour was 10 days long (I know this, because I had a "family obligation/vacation" planned and the first night was the night before we flew out and the last date was the date I flew home, Easter Sunday).  The last Flying Colors "tour" (because you can barely call it that) was three US dates and four European dates, with one being filmed.   At that point you don't even have the setlist under your fingers yet. Each DT tour is 100 dates, plus or minus. 

If anything, not to stir the pot, but if you compare the 100 or so dates he does each year he's had MORE of a varied setlist experience than he ever had in Dream Theater. With most gigs he's done recently there's ZERO crossover. 

[Samsara]

What would be the purpose to 'script' this over a 13 year period?  What would be their desired result of doing this for so long?

Yeah, I'm with wolfking here–a 13-year plan makes for a fun story, but in reality, it really stretches the boundaries of plausibility.

Agreed. That's silly.

I think the MP reunion has been in the works the last few years. I always thought the moment he mended fences with JP that it would happen. I just didn't know when.

The Rush thing is interesting. I mean, MP is back home where he belongs. But here's a thought. What if...just saying, what IF, Ged and Al called and said something like this:

"Mike! Rush is going out on tour again! But we're tired of the evening with format. We're old, and honestly, we really only want to play 90-minute shows instead of 3 hours. So, would Dream Theater be interested in doing an hour opening set for us, and then we'll do 90 minutes and you can drum for us?"

No one in Dream Theater would say no, IMO. And Rush very well may be thinking along those lines, IMO. The marathon days are likely over, and if they want MP (and that would make sense) this would be a great way to do it and pay tribute to Neil and to Rush history.

MP doing double-duty isn't a stretch if the bands are touring together.

[HOF]

Here is more detail regarding that exchange. I am going to paraphrase from memory so please forgive me if I don't get the wording 100%.

As Scotty mentioned, JP said MP gets bored and can play any DT song straight from memory. But for JP, he said that he has to learn a ton of parts so for example relearning Octavarium (I think he used Octavarium specifically as an example) is a ton of work for him. He said that he has really enjoyed NOT doing different setlists the last couple years because it allows him to focus on the production of the shows. He basically said that some degree of changes each night were very likely to happen, though he did not say to what extent. He didn't say 100% but my read of the response was that the days of the same exact setlist each and every night are over.

None of the other 'public' questions are worth discussing.

What's interesting to me is that none of MP's post-DT projects (or any of his side projects during his first tenure with DT) ever did the rotating setlists thing. I can totally see him as the guy who gets bored playing the same static set over and over again, but that's basically what he has been doing for the past 13 years. Sure, he did have a lot of variation switching between various bands each year, but every specific tour he did for each band had for the most part a rock steady setlist throughout each show.

I guess MP also might not have had the pull to do the rotating setlists he wants in the other bands.  In DT he certainly used to have that power, and it seems he'll be getting at least some of that control back if JP already acknowledges rotating setlists are coming back.

Or the deep catalog to pull from either.

[bosk1]

What would be the purpose to 'script' this over a 13 year period?  What would be their desired result of doing this for so long?

Yeah, I'm with wolfking here–a 13-year plan makes for a fun story, but in reality, it really stretches the boundaries of plausibility.

Agreed. That's silly.

I think the MP reunion has been in the works the last few years. I always thought the moment he mended fences with JP that it would happen. I just didn't know when.

The Rush thing is interesting. I mean, MP is back home where he belongs. But here's a thought. What if...just saying, what IF, Ged and Al called and said something like this:

"Mike! Rush is going out on tour again! But we're tired of the evening with format. We're old, and honestly, we really only want to play 90-minute shows instead of 3 hours. So, would Dream Theater be interested in doing an hour opening set for us, and then we'll do 90 minutes and you can drum for us?"

No one in Dream Theater would say no, IMO. And Rush very well may be thinking along those lines, IMO. The marathon days are likely over, and if they want MP (and that would make sense) this would be a great way to do it and pay tribute to Neil and to Rush history.

MP doing double-duty isn't a stretch if the bands are touring together.

Yeah, if that phone call ever came, I have little doubt that DT would agree in a heartbeat.  I think they said at one point several years ago that the only bands they would consider going out and opening for would be Rush and, possibly, if memory serves, Metallica (although I am not 100% sure whether they mentioned that last one).  Of course, we all know things change and it's silly to hold someone to something they said over a decade ago, but I see little reason to believe their opinions would have changed about this.  I think there are a select number of bands they would love to tour with and open for if the call ever came, and I think Rush is at the top of that list.  I know I'd love to see that if it ever happened, even though my interest in Rush is otherwise zero.

[gzarruk]

Here is more detail regarding that exchange. I am going to paraphrase from memory so please forgive me if I don't get the wording 100%.

As Scotty mentioned, JP said MP gets bored and can play any DT song straight from memory. But for JP, he said that he has to learn a ton of parts so for example relearning Octavarium (I think he used Octavarium specifically as an example) is a ton of work for him. He said that he has really enjoyed NOT doing different setlists the last couple years because it allows him to focus on the production of the shows. He basically said that some degree of changes each night were very likely to happen, though he did not say to what extent. He didn't say 100% but my read of the response was that the days of the same exact setlist each and every night are over.

None of the other 'public' questions are worth discussing.

What's interesting to me is that none of MP's post-DT projects (or any of his side projects during his first tenure with DT) ever did the rotating setlists thing. I can totally see him as the guy who gets bored playing the same static set over and over again, but that's basically what he has been doing for the past 13 years. Sure, he did have a lot of variation switching between various bands each year, but every specific tour he did for each band had for the most part a rock steady setlist throughout each show.

Apples and Cadillacs.   The last Transatlantic tour was 10 days long (I know this, because I had a "family obligation/vacation" planned and the first night was the night before we flew out and the last date was the date I flew home, Easter Sunday).  The last Flying Colors "tour" (because you can barely call it that) was three US dates and four European dates, with one being filmed.   At that point you don't even have the setlist under your fingers yet. Each DT tour is 100 dates, plus or minus. 

If anything, not to stir the pot, but if you compare the 100 or so dates he does each year he's had MORE of a varied setlist experience than he ever had in Dream Theater. With most gigs he's done recently there's ZERO crossover.

I'll start by saying I have no preference/position for one or the other options, really. In fact, I think rotating setlists are a lot more valuable than the static thing, but I'm just saying it's interesting to me how these things work here and how fan spectation plays a huge role here as well (people EXPECT DT to rotate setlists because that's what they used to do). But you chose the two worst examples here for your point. TA and FC have never been actively touring bands.

What about Neal Morse/NMB? They certainly toured a lot the last few years (haven't done the math on how many shows they did) and there's definitely a big enough catalog to rotate there, but they just didn't. No need to rotate a big chunk of the setlist either, just cycle a few songs in and out. Am I saying they should've? Not at all. I just find interesting how fan expectation for DT (with or without MP) is a lot different than what MP ever did anywhere else.

[Setlist Scotty]

Here is more detail regarding that exchange. I am going to paraphrase from memory so please forgive me if I don't get the wording 100%.

As Scotty mentioned, JP said MP gets bored and can play any DT song straight from memory. But for JP, he said that he has to learn a ton of parts so for example relearning Octavarium (I think he used Octavarium specifically as an example) is a ton of work for him. He said that he has really enjoyed NOT doing different setlists the last couple years because it allows him to focus on the production of the shows. He basically said that some degree of changes each night were very likely to happen, though he did not say to what extent. He didn't say 100% but my read of the response was that the days of the same exact setlist each and every night are over.

None of the other 'public' questions are worth discussing.

What's interesting to me is that none of MP's post-DT projects (or any of his side projects during his first tenure with DT) ever did the rotating setlists thing. I can totally see him as the guy who gets bored playing the same static set over and over again, but that's basically what he has been doing for the past 13 years. Sure, he did have a lot of variation switching between various bands each year, but every specific tour he did for each band had for the most part a rock steady setlist throughout each show.

Apples and Cadillacs.   The last Transatlantic tour was 10 days long (I know this, because I had a "family obligation/vacation" planned and the first night was the night before we flew out and the last date was the date I flew home, Easter Sunday).  The last Flying Colors "tour" (because you can barely call it that) was three US dates and four European dates, with one being filmed.   At that point you don't even have the setlist under your fingers yet. Each DT tour is 100 dates, plus or minus. 

If anything, not to stir the pot, but if you compare the 100 or so dates he does each year he's had MORE of a varied setlist experience than he ever had in Dream Theater. With most gigs he's done recently there's ZERO crossover.

I'll start by saying I have no preference/position for one or the other options, really. In fact, I think rotating setlists are a lot more valuable than the static thing, but I'm just saying it's interesting to me how these things work here and how fan spectation plays a huge role here as well (people EXPECT DT to rotate setlists because that's what they used to do). But you chose the two worst examples here for your point. TA and FC have never been actively touring bands.

What about Neal Morse/NMB? They certainly toured a lot the last few years (haven't done the math on how many shows they did) and there's definitely a big enough catalog to rotate there, but they just didn't. No need to rotate a big chunk of the setlist either, just cycle a few songs in and out. Am I saying they should've? Not at all. I just find interesting how fan expectation for DT (with or without MP) is a lot different than what MP ever did anywhere else.

That's a good point, but I just checked setlist.fm to see how many shows that NM/NMB has played, and the total comes out to 342. Spread that out over the last 20 years, and remember that he didn't play all those gigs with Neal, and you can see it's a drop in the bucket compared to what he was doing with DT. Even if you just focus on what he did with the NMB since it was formed, they've only done about 166 shows since 2015.

The closest thing would be TWD, who have done 306 shows since 2013 according to setlist.fm, and obviously there were some long breaks during that time period. Not sure how much the setlist varied but it was probably pretty static. Why he was fine with it in that band, I don't know. But I agree with Stads that most of his bands/projects have a pretty small number of shows per tour compared to what DT did.

[Stadler]

What would be the purpose to 'script' this over a 13 year period?  What would be their desired result of doing this for so long?

Yeah, I'm with wolfking here–a 13-year plan makes for a fun story, but in reality, it really stretches the boundaries of plausibility.

Agreed. That's silly.

I think the MP reunion has been in the works the last few years. I always thought the moment he mended fences with JP that it would happen. I just didn't know when.

The Rush thing is interesting. I mean, MP is back home where he belongs. But here's a thought. What if...just saying, what IF, Ged and Al called and said something like this:

"Mike! Rush is going out on tour again! But we're tired of the evening with format. We're old, and honestly, we really only want to play 90-minute shows instead of 3 hours. So, would Dream Theater be interested in doing an hour opening set for us, and then we'll do 90 minutes and you can drum for us?"

No one in Dream Theater would say no, IMO. And Rush very well may be thinking along those lines, IMO. The marathon days are likely over, and if they want MP (and that would make sense) this would be a great way to do it and pay tribute to Neil and to Rush history.

MP doing double-duty isn't a stretch if the bands are touring together.

Yeah, if that phone call ever came, I have little doubt that DT would agree in a heartbeat.  I think they said at one point several years ago that the only bands they would consider going out and opening for would be Rush and, possibly, if memory serves, Metallica (although I am not 100% sure whether they mentioned that last one).  Of course, we all know things change and it's silly to hold someone to something they said over a decade ago, but I see little reason to believe their opinions would have changed about this.  I think there are a select number of bands they would love to tour with and open for if the call ever came, and I think Rush is at the top of that list.  I know I'd love to see that if it ever happened, even though my interest in Rush is otherwise zero.

You don't read the forum much, do you. Or newspapers for that matter.   

[cramx3]

What would be the purpose to 'script' this over a 13 year period?  What would be their desired result of doing this for so long?

Yeah, I'm with wolfking here–a 13-year plan makes for a fun story, but in reality, it really stretches the boundaries of plausibility.

Agreed. That's silly.

I think the MP reunion has been in the works the last few years. I always thought the moment he mended fences with JP that it would happen. I just didn't know when.

The Rush thing is interesting. I mean, MP is back home where he belongs. But here's a thought. What if...just saying, what IF, Ged and Al called and said something like this:

"Mike! Rush is going out on tour again! But we're tired of the evening with format. We're old, and honestly, we really only want to play 90-minute shows instead of 3 hours. So, would Dream Theater be interested in doing an hour opening set for us, and then we'll do 90 minutes and you can drum for us?"

No one in Dream Theater would say no, IMO. And Rush very well may be thinking along those lines, IMO. The marathon days are likely over, and if they want MP (and that would make sense) this would be a great way to do it and pay tribute to Neil and to Rush history.

MP doing double-duty isn't a stretch if the bands are touring together.

This would actually get me to go and see a Rush concert

[Ben_Jamin]

With regards to rotating setlists....

I would not mind at all to bring these back. But at the same time, in my area, we would always get the same songs. The hit (PMU), Home, and the rest of the Iron Maiden Setlist....Although, when they came for Gigantour, which was when I wasn't that much of a fan yet, we got so many great songs such as Never Enough and them opening with TGP/TDS.

[Setlist Scotty]

With regards to rotating setlists....

I would not mind at all to bring these back. But at the same time, in my area, we would always get the same songs. The hit (PMU), Home, and the rest of the Iron Maiden Setlist....Although, when they came for Gigantour, which was when I wasn't that much of a fan yet, we got so many great songs such as Never Enough and them opening with TGP/TDS.

If MP is back in the driver's seat for doing the setlists, you can be sure that whatever you see will be different from the last time they played your city - that's the one thing he was always very careful to do. There's only 2 real exceptions to that rule: when their shooting a live video/recording a live album, and when they're opening for another band/artist or (to some extent, playing a big European festival).

Don't forget that the Maiden setlist was designed not for us fans but for Maiden's fans as a means of grabbing their interest. Had they used their allotted time to fill it out with weird and crazy stuff that us diehards love, the number of Maiden fans that would have an interest in checking them out after seeing them live would probably be far less. Same was true when they opened for Yes in 2004 and Deep Purple/ELP in 1998. All of which were static setlists, BTW.

[TAC]

Don't forget that the Maiden setlist was designed not for us fans but for Maiden's fans as a means of grabbing their interest.

On the surface, that Maiden setlist included songs I'd totally skip, but that setlist was a masterclass the way it was built. Each song was a little more faster and intense than the song before it, so it built in intensity as it went on, culminating in PMU.
The boot to the MSG is awesome, because you can literally hear the people getting more and more into it as the show went on.

[Dream Team]

MP is a guest on the Sea of Tranquility YouTube show tonight, maybe Pete will get some tidbits out of him.

[TAC]

MP is a guest on the Sea of Tranquility YouTube show tonight, maybe Pete will get some tidbits out of him.

Oh nice!! Thanks for the heads up! What time?

[Dream Team]

Premiers at 9:00pm.

[DTwwbwMP]

Premiers at 9:00pm.

link?

[TAC]

Premiers at 9:00pm.

link?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CkWPcwBXnRQ


It's a podcast with like 6 guys taking WDADU. I wish they'd shut the hell up. The same guy has been talking for like 5 minutes.

I don't know if I can hang through the whole thing.

[DTwwbwMP]

Premiers at 9:00pm.

link?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CkWPcwBXnRQ


It's a podcast with like 6 guys taking WDADU. I wish they'd shut the hell up. The same guy has been talking for like 5 minutes.

I don't know if I can hang through the whole thing.

 

[HOF]

Premiers at 9:00pm.

link?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CkWPcwBXnRQ


It's a podcast with like 6 guys taking WDADU. I wish they'd shut the hell up. The same guy has been talking for like 5 minutes.

I don't know if I can hang through the whole thing.

Yeah, I have a hard time with these types of roundtable discussion videos.

[TAC]

I sat through it. I was really interested in what MP might say, but the thing was pretty much all on WDADU.

He did say that he had a multi camera pro shot of the Manhattan Center '93 show in his archives and if he gets back involved in the official bootleg thingy, that he'd like to release it.

Nothing on current DT news, other than to say that once his commitments finish, he'd be 100% focused on DT, but in the next breath, he said they were getting to work after the new year.

[gzarruk]

He did say that he had a multi camera pro shot of the Manhattan Center '93 show in his archives and if he gets back involved in the official bootleg thingy, that he'd like to release it.

That'd be nice.

[TheBarstoolWarrior]

Here is my other anecdote from the JP Rock the Barrel event.

After the Q&A, JP and the distiller did a signing/meet&greet thing. During this part, JP was asked by more than one person why DT decided to change drummers at this time. His exact was response was 'timing just felt right.' He was not curt or visibly annoyed by the question but clearly he did not want to say anything else in response.

[crystalstars17]

As Scotty mentioned, JP said MP gets bored and can play any DT song straight from memory.

Oh, excuse me, but is it wrong to expect that any professional should know that it's not about just doing whatever you want, but about producing a structured deliverable?

He basically said that some degree of changes each night were very likely to happen, though he did not say to what extent. He didn't say 100% but my read of the response was that the days of the same exact setlist each and every night are over.

This is disconcerting and I still can't get my head around why some people are happy about this or even why they would want it.

I guess MP also might not have had the pull to do the rotating setlists he wants in the other bands.  In DT he certainly used to have that power, and it seems he'll be getting at least some of that control back if JP already acknowledges rotating setlists are coming back.

But did he actually confirm this, or are people who want this so badly just reading a confirmation into these few words?

[Awaken]

As Scotty mentioned, JP said MP gets bored and can play any DT song straight from memory.

Oh, excuse me, but is it wrong to expect that any professional should know that it's not about just doing whatever you want, but about producing a structured deliverable?

He basically said that some degree of changes each night were very likely to happen, though he did not say to what extent. He didn't say 100% but my read of the response was that the days of the same exact setlist each and every night are over.

This is disconcerting and I still can't get my head around why some people are happy about this or even why they would want it.

I guess MP also might not have had the pull to do the rotating setlists he wants in the other bands.  In DT he certainly used to have that power, and it seems he'll be getting at least some of that control back .

But did he actually confirm this, or are people who want this so badly just reading a confirmation into these few words?

I can only speak for myself, but a few reasons:
1)  I used to love traveling to multiple shows on a leg and hearing songs I'd never heard before. 
2)  Jams/extended or alternate versions are fun to witness live
3)  I have loved DT's production over the past 10-15 years, I just miss having some surprises.  Knowing it's not the exact same production on each stop makes me want to attend multiple stops.
4)  I'm extremely fortunate to be within the general area that DT is from, so seeing multiple shows (CT, MA, NH, NJ, NY, RI) is very doable on any tour cycle - even 'escape from the studio' type gigs. 

Again, I have loved the MM era.  The band has been awesome every time I've seen them and the production has been top notch.  But that doesn't mean I haven't missed many aspects of the MP era and I'm kinda excited to revisit them.

[crystalstars17]

I can only speak for myself, but a few reasons:
1)  I used to love traveling to multiple shows on a leg and hearing songs I'd never heard before. 
2)  Jams/extended or alternate versions are fun to witness live
3)  I have loved DT's production over the past 10-15 years, I just miss having some surprises.  Knowing it's not the exact same production on each stop makes me want to attend multiple stops.
4)  I'm extremely fortunate to be within the general area that DT is from, so seeing multiple shows (CT, MA, NH, NJ, NY, RI) is very doable on any tour cycle - even 'escape from the studio' type gigs. 

Again, I have loved the MM era.  The band has been awesome every time I've seen them and the production has been top notch.  But that doesn't mean I haven't missed many aspects of the MP era and I'm kinda excited to revisit them.

This is an entirely fair answer. I will say however that despite being in the same exact region as you, you are still extremely fortunate to be able to catch multiple shows. I'm sure I speak for others also when I say that more than one or two per tour is not possible due to scheduling constraints for many people (and DT is by far not the only band I support, so I need to use that limited time in a way that is feasibly possible).

Editing to add that I hope they can come to some sort of a compromise between the two extremes (such as only rotating a few songs).

[Awaken]

I can only speak for myself, but a few reasons:
1)  I used to love traveling to multiple shows on a leg and hearing songs I'd never heard before. 
2)  Jams/extended or alternate versions are fun to witness live
3)  I have loved DT's production over the past 10-15 years, I just miss having some surprises.  Knowing it's not the exact same production on each stop makes me want to attend multiple stops.
4)  I'm extremely fortunate to be within the general area that DT is from, so seeing multiple shows (CT, MA, NH, NJ, NY, RI) is very doable on any tour cycle - even 'escape from the studio' type gigs. 

Again, I have loved the MM era.  The band has been awesome every time I've seen them and the production has been top notch.  But that doesn't mean I haven't missed many aspects of the MP era and I'm kinda excited to revisit them.

This is an entirely fair answer. I will say however that despite being in the same exact region as you, you are still extremely fortunate to be able to catch multiple shows. I'm sure I speak for others also when I say that more than one or two per tour is not possible due to scheduling constraints for many people (and DT is by far not the only band I support, so I need to use that limited time in a way that is feasibly possible).

Totally understand this perspective too. 

[Stadler]

I can only speak for myself, but a few reasons:
1)  I used to love traveling to multiple shows on a leg and hearing songs I'd never heard before. 
2)  Jams/extended or alternate versions are fun to witness live
3)  I have loved DT's production over the past 10-15 years, I just miss having some surprises.  Knowing it's not the exact same production on each stop makes me want to attend multiple stops.
4)  I'm extremely fortunate to be within the general area that DT is from, so seeing multiple shows (CT, MA, NH, NJ, NY, RI) is very doable on any tour cycle - even 'escape from the studio' type gigs. 

Again, I have loved the MM era.  The band has been awesome every time I've seen them and the production has been top notch.  But that doesn't mean I haven't missed many aspects of the MP era and I'm kinda excited to revisit them.

This is an entirely fair answer. I will say however that despite being in the same exact region as you, you are still extremely fortunate to be able to catch multiple shows. I'm sure I speak for others also when I say that more than one or two per tour is not possible due to scheduling constraints for many people (and DT is by far not the only band I support, so I need to use that limited time in a way that is feasibly possible).

But isn't it one of those things where you can both have what you want?  You still get to see one show, and you see that show.  Only the cosmos knows whether if there was static setlist if you would have seen a different show.   So those of us that only see one show accept the presentation we get. That's our experience.  But those that can or do see multiple shows get to have something slightly new for the "effort". 

While I do respect everyone's opinion on this, I would love to understand better all the points of view, and to be honest, I'm really struggling to understand this concept of being "ripped off" because a song or two was played at another show somewhere else that I never had any intention of seeing anyway.  I've got over 350 shows under my belt at this point, and I honestly cannot name ONE where I was like "Great show, but Poughkeepsie got 'Bohemian Rhapsody' and I didn't."  "FOMO" doesn't seem to me to be a band problem; it seems to me to be a fan problem. 

[crystalstars17]

But isn't it one of those things where you can both have what you want?  You still get to see one show, and you see that show.  Only the cosmos knows whether if there was static setlist if you would have seen a different show.   So those of us that only see one show accept the presentation we get. That's our experience.  But those that can or do see multiple shows get to have something slightly new for the "effort". 

First of all, that's a privileged point of view. "Those that can..." get some sort of reward. For any number of reasons, not everyone can, period, as much as they may wish to put in that "effort". It's not just all about effort, for example the aggrivation and energy it takes to drive through three states to see another show. For some people it's other, more pressing factors such as in my case where I simply could not get that much time off in a year and still have my job (where I am established, but still have to follow certain rules about how much time off I am allowed within certain parameters). Or in the case of someone like my younger brother for example who being quite young is not yet established enough financially to buy that many tickets.

While I do respect everyone's opinion on this, I would love to understand better all the points of view, and to be honest, I'm really struggling to understand this concept of being "ripped off" because a song or two was played at another show somewhere else that I never had any intention of seeing anyway.  I've got over 350 shows under my belt at this point, and I honestly cannot name ONE where I was like "Great show, but Poughkeepsie got 'Bohemian Rhapsody' and I didn't."  "FOMO" doesn't seem to me to be a band problem; it seems to me to be a fan problem.

As I explained above, thinking "FOMO" is the issue is also privilege talking. It's not simply about that for many people.

Also, do you really think nobody looks at published setlists? Even ahead of buying tickets? If anything, if the band wants people to buy more tickets to more shows, they'd be better off not rotating setlists each night, but making sure they change up the setlists for each leg/tour. Because otherwise, for example, I'd be less likely to buy a ticket on the second leg for a show in Boston if it's the same exact setlist we got six months ago in Wallingford. In that event, I could probably think of better ways to use up that precious allotted time off (like maybe by supporting another band this time around).

[Stadler]

But isn't it one of those things where you can both have what you want?  You still get to see one show, and you see that show.  Only the cosmos knows whether if there was static setlist if you would have seen a different show.   So those of us that only see one show accept the presentation we get. That's our experience.  But those that can or do see multiple shows get to have something slightly new for the "effort". 

First of all, that's a privileged point of view. "Those that can..." get some sort of reward. For any number of reasons, not everyone can, period, as much as they may wish to put in that "effort". It's not just all about effort, for example the aggrivation and energy it takes to drive through three states to see another show. For some people it's other, more pressing factors such as in my case where I simply could not get that much time off in a year and still have my job (where I am established, but still have to follow certain rules about how much time off I am allowed within certain parameters). Or in the case of someone like my younger brother for example who being quite young is not yet established enough financially to buy that many tickets.

That's why it was in quotes; believe me, I understand that it's not always easy or practical to see the shows we WANT to see.  But maybe I'm jaded, here, but that's life. You keep saying "privilege", but I'm starting from a position that we have ZERO entitlement to ANY of this.  It's ALL a gift. We're talking setlists here, but by this reckoning, cruises are a rip off for every fan that can't go, Morsefest is a rip off for every fan that can't go, Marillion Weekend is a rip off for every fan that can't go...  I get it, I really do. But this is exactly why I say it's "FOMO". It's not Neal's or Marillion's or Dream Theater's responsibility that every single fan gets the exact same "value" or "benefit" by their output.

While I do respect everyone's opinion on this, I would love to understand better all the points of view, and to be honest, I'm really struggling to understand this concept of being "ripped off" because a song or two was played at another show somewhere else that I never had any intention of seeing anyway.  I've got over 350 shows under my belt at this point, and I honestly cannot name ONE where I was like "Great show, but Poughkeepsie got 'Bohemian Rhapsody' and I didn't."  "FOMO" doesn't seem to me to be a band problem; it seems to me to be a fan problem.

As I explained above, thinking "FOMO" is the issue is also privilege talking. It's not simply about that for many people.

Also, do you really think nobody looks at published setlists? Even ahead of buying tickets? If anything, if the band wants people to buy more tickets to more shows, they'd be better off not rotating setlists each night, but making sure they change up the setlists for each leg/tour. Because otherwise, for example, I'd be less likely to buy a ticket on the second leg for a show in Boston if it's the same exact setlist we got six months ago in Wallingford. In that event, I could probably think of better ways to use up that precious allotted time off (like maybe by supporting another band this time around).

If it's not "FOMO", what is it, then? That's the question I'm asking.  And I'm trying not to ask it in a confrontational way, I'm sincerely curious. What does the setlist in Poughkeepsie or Albany or Buffalo have to do with the show I see in Wallingford or Bridgeport? 

Look, as a Kiss fan, I hear you on some of this; Kiss has been touring the same setlist since 1996 more or less. And maybe that's informed me here; I know I'm not going to get "She" or some of the deeper tracks and so I make my choices accordingly; I'm never going to a Kiss show with the understanding that "I'm going to hear this". And yes, I understand looking up setlist; I have an account at Setlist.fm and I will sometimes be the guy updating the list at the show (or at intermission, whatever).  But there seems to me a difference between that and an EXPECTATION that I hear a certain song.  I don't want to get into a back and forth with you here - it's a civil conversation and as I noted, I'm seeking answers - but the real "privilege" seems to me to be this idea that I'm somehow entitled to a certain song.  Short of the band not taking the stage, I don't feel the fan has ANY entitlement to what goes on, UNLESS there is something specifically billed.  If Gene opts not to fly to the rafters during "God Of Thunder" (has happened twice to me), or Devin decides not to sing the encore with James at my show (didn't happen), I don't have any entitlement to that, nor do I have any expectation of it.

[gborland]

This is disconcerting and I still can't get my head around why some people are happy about this or even why they would want it.

You can't understand why people don't want the same thing night after night? Why people may look forward to not knowing what they're going to experience at a live rock concert?

[Indiscipline]

Focking spoiled rotten Poughkeepsie.

[OpenYourEyes311]

While I do respect everyone's opinion on this, I would love to understand better all the points of view, and to be honest, I'm really struggling to understand this concept of being "ripped off" because a song or two was played at another show somewhere else that I never had any intention of seeing anyway.  I've got over 350 shows under my belt at this point, and I honestly cannot name ONE where I was like "Great show, but Poughkeepsie got 'Bohemian Rhapsody' and I didn't."  "FOMO" doesn't seem to me to be a band problem; it seems to me to be a fan problem.

I've only ever felt "ripped off" when it had to do with DT setlists once. And yeah, you're right, it's totally a me problem. When I missed Misunderstood five times in a row in 2007, and then they played it on night #6, which I didn't go to, I didn't feel that way, because I was never going to Pennsylvania anyway, like you said, and I knew they were rotating and there was a good chance of not seeing one song or another. However, when I was waiting for the Images and Words and Beyond tour to show up to Boston, I had seen that they were playing Don't Look Past Me on some of the shows prior and was STOKED to see something so rare. It would be an understatement to say that I was disappointed when I was at the show and figured out they completely dropped it from the set (and didn't even replace it). It honestly bothered me to the point that I was not enjoying the second half of the show. Again, you're right, it's a me problem. But that's not FOMO. That's knowing I missed out and also knowing that song will never make another setlist. I've since come to be at peace with it lol, but man was I hurtin on that one for a while.

[Buddyhunter1]

Here is more detail regarding that exchange. I am going to paraphrase from memory so please forgive me if I don't get the wording 100%.

As Scotty mentioned, JP said MP gets bored and can play any DT song straight from memory. But for JP, he said that he has to learn a ton of parts so for example relearning Octavarium (I think he used Octavarium specifically as an example) is a ton of work for him. He said that he has really enjoyed NOT doing different setlists the last couple years because it allows him to focus on the production of the shows. He basically said that some degree of changes each night were very likely to happen, though he did not say to what extent. He didn't say 100% but my read of the response was that the days of the same exact setlist each and every night are over.

None of the other 'public' questions are worth discussing.

If the videos from the last tour were any indication, I feel like that focus was going into the wrong places. The main argument I see for static setlists is that it theoretically improves the quality of each show, because they get more practice / focus for each of the songs, and the production can be specifically tailored for the setlist. In practice, and having seen the band almost every North American tour since 2011, I'm not convinced. I don't really go to Dream Theater shows for the production. Their lighting is usually good but never something that particularly stands out to me, the videos range from inoffensive to just lame, and... that's it? As for the band's performance, Dream Theater (ignoring James' struggles for a moment) has the benefit of being one of the most technically proficient and consistent live bands out there. Regardless of if they've played a song twenty times or two times in the tour, you can be fairly certain they'll play it flawlessly. If there's any improvement to their performance from the static setlists, I doubt it's noticeable.

As someone who only sees one show per tour and never looks up setlists ahead of time, to me the only "danger" of rotating setlists is the chance that you could get a crappier set than everyone else. But that feels more like a hypothetical issue than an actual one. Has the average quality of setlists really gone up since Portnoy left? Setlists that last the entire tour can be underwhelming too - that was the biggest problem with the DreamSonic tour in my opinion.

That said, I do understand the frustration of seeing a song you really wanted to see get played at other shows, but not yours. That's one of the reasons I don't look up setlists ahead of time, as it can create false expectations when there are rotating songs in play.

[DoctorAction]

I feel like there should be a future setlist-with-Portnoy speculation thread. I'm excited he's back but whatever they play next time they come around is just one factor.